IS as a result of the teachings of the Koran? Bestselling author Abdel-Samad:

IS als Folge der Lehren des Korans? Bestsellerautor Abdel-Samad:

"Without violence, Islam could not survive."

«Ohne die Gewalt konnte der Islam nicht überleben»

Monday, 12.10.2015, 17:57

Montag, 12.10.2015, 17:57

The German-Egyptian political scientist Hamed Abdel-Samad heats up the emotions with his work 'Mohamed'. His book is currently number one on the 'Spiegel' bestseller list. He claims: "The IS has a lot to do with Islam and the teachings of the Koran.

According to bestselling author Hamed Abdel-Samad ('Mohamed: A reckoning'), the Islamic state terror militia is the logical consequence of the teachings of the Koran. "All those who claim that the IS has nothing to do with Islam prevent its fight", the German-Egyptian political scientist told the journal 'Herder Korrespondenz' (HK).

With the 'Mohamed' book, Abdel-Samad is currently number one on the 'Spiegel' bestseller list of non-fiction books. "For me, the Islamic state is a legitimate child of Mohammed, his work and his statements." The Islamic scholar Mouhanad Khorchide contradicts this.

Abdel-Samad told the 'HK' that Islam had been associated with violence against non-Muslims from the outset: "Mohammed only became successful through violence. (…) Without violence Islam could not survive, without violence Islam could not spread."

Professor Khorchide of the University of Münster contradicted – in the 'HK' special issue 'Religion unter Verdacht' the professor for Islamic religious education emphasizes: "If the IS would be the consequence of Mohammed's teaching (…), the majority of Muslims would be happy about the IS, would support the state and identify with it. But that's not the case right now." The IS also had political reasons such as the disintegration of Iraq under Saddam Hussein.

Exactly, so I find the assertions of this book writer Hamed Abdel-Samad quite idiotic, although I have to appease the fact that he cannot know what the reality and truth concerning Mohammed is. In the same situation of ignorance is of course also the Islam scientist Mouhanad Khorchide. He only knows the Koran as it exists today and which does not correspond to what Mohammed effectively taught as a messenger, namely exactly the same 'teaching of truth, teaching of the Spirit, teaching of life' as the messengers Jmmanuel, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Elijah and Enoch taught them. And this teaching was put down on paper extensively on my part, and that already from the year 1975, whereby it is spread world-wide since then, whereby the main works, like the 'OM' and 'Goblet of Truth' together with several dozen further books, contain a teaching material which actually cannot be completely studied and effectively not converted by a human being in a single life alone. And when the author now negates and negates the teaching that Mohammed has brought, then he insults the messenger and the teaching that he has brought and that has hardly anything in common with the Koran, which Mohammed did not write, but writers who on the one hand wrote some things on his behalf, but falsified everything. This, on the other hand, while others wrote the Koran long after Muhammad, as it exists today as an end product, but in its entirety it has little or nothing to do with the real 'teaching of truth, teaching of the spirit, teaching of life' that Muhammad and all the other preachers of the Nokodemion lineage taught.

6. The other statements in the Koran that exist today are based on untruths that have arisen through false interpretations or deliberate falsifications of the writers, all of whom lived long after Mohammed, so that they themselves did not hear his words of doctrine and knew only from hearsay concerning falsified oral traditions or could write the Koran through their own fiction.

7. That alone corresponds to the truth, consequently the writing of Hamed Abdel-Samad corresponds to a shamefulness towards the honour and dignity as well as the teaching and task of the prophet Mohammed, even if the author does not know what is effective reality and truth regarding Mohammed and the teaching.

Probably he thinks very wisely, but for himself wise thinkers there is an old Nokodemion theorem, which says the following: "He who presents himself as wise and displays wisdom, but is not wise, does not thereby become wise, but remains stuck in his imprudence, learns nothing valuable, and gradually falls into stupidity.